Innovation As A Cultural Phenomenon

Unlike the commercial entity, the organisation we call “Society” is neither forced to innovate for its
ongoing survival, nor does it appear to actively foster innovation, rather reacting to present changes
naturally occurring.

While this may be true in certain Societies, the unforgiving reality is that those societies and cultural
entities that fail to foster such innovation, rather than fade away – picked off by the invisible hand of
Smith – are gently, but forcibly propelled into the dark realm of poverty, backwardness and human
suffering, where rescue involves a colossal reversal of momentum, and investment of capital and human
resources. No institute involved in the governance of a Nation or Society should ever allow this to happen
– and by this I mean not merely the government; although its role is not insubstantial, but also those
cultural institutions, including the media, cultural warehouses, even educational and religious institutions
- but must aggressively defend their stakes, and foster their people’s development.

There are two real ways to do that: Periphery Proprietorship and Culture Control. The secret here veiled is
that no successful culture is ever able to perform one alone – it may mask its involvement in the other, it
may not actively engage with it and out of chance it organically evolves, but nonetheless both are
absolutely necessary in the development of an economically, culturally, spiritually and materially sound
Society.

In the creation of such a Society, it is easy marginalise those fringes, those Peripheries of Society who fail
to buy into and live in the worlds of the mainstream. Ignoring these Peripheries is the most effective way
to ensure cultural decline: it is the Peripheries that challenge existing teachings, it is the Peripheries who
react in reacting to cultural trends breath new life into the culture, it is the Peripheries who, by the very
process of their perceived exclusion, develop new unique identities, processes, structures and ways of
being, which ultimately form the lifeblood of a civilisation into its prosperous future.

Yet, this is not merely a passive affair – only those Societies dependant upon good fortune would regard
this as passive – it requires investment in infrastructures and process by which to take ownership of these
Peripheral creations and technologies, a process called “Periphery Proprietorship,” as a Society is able to
assimilate the wisdom of its most radical and creative thinkers. This involves actively fostering the
peripheries, actively increasing the ‘number’ of peripheries and their depth, because as we all know
competition increases consumption – Western Society successfully achieves this with Capitalism-
Consumerism, whose invisible hand forces the continual creation of new boundaries and niche markets,
who are driven by survival and natural selection to ensure their own survival and depth.

However, it is not that the Periphery is isolated or that the mainstream is locked, rather there is a mobility
between these areas, they are fluid and dynamic and multi-faceted, still the truth is that the crowd, while
powerful and important, has neither the time nor the interest to become revolutionary and to innovate in
all areas. As we know, the Peripheries are filled with revolutionaries, visionaries and other radical
elements; however, these elements are rarely able to (or interested in) articulate their developments in a
manner appropriate to the mainstream; hence the need for the reciprocal process of “Culture Control”.

Throughout the world today, people are beginning to see that a modern society, whether democratic or
authoritarian, cannot withstand the subterranean forces of anarchy and chaos without Culture Control. It
is not only a matter of doing the right thing or producing the most beneficial product; the people must
understand that the right thing is the right thing, the most beneficial product is the most beneficial.
Culture Control includes everything that helps the people to realise this, everything necessary to
popularise the challenging ideas of the fringe.

In order to ensure Peripheral innovations are made available to the remnant of Society and have a
cumulative effect towards the collective betterment of Society we require persons with a ‘dual-
nationality’, residing both in the realm of the Periphery, yet who have a deep identity level mastery of the
popular soul, and further, who are true artists and are able to instrumentalise the majesty of innovation
genuinely into a creation simple enough to be understood and embraced by the common person.
Therefore, Culture Control is only ever a positive force, enabling a Society to embrace its hidden
strength. So we openly espouse a specialist approach to Societal governance – in any Society, ancient or
modern, the bulk of the population is undereducated in any given area: there are only a handful of
specialists in any given area. Would you trust a common man to remove your appendix? Surely not. So it
is in the worlds of politics, religion, art, culture and fashion. The knowledgeable and the ground-breaking
in these respective fields naturally rise to prominence and guide discussion, but occasionally are unable to
make their voices heard, or are drowned out by cultural clutter; it is here that Culture Control saves us.

A culturally Reactionary approach to innovation results in sustenance; but rarely development, and
eventually in stagnation and decay – at which stage the revolutionary Periphery begins to depart,
crumbling a Society further yet, turns upon their masters and through whichever revolutionary means
forces the realignment of the society. The only sound approach for long-term successful Societal
governance is Societal Innovation Management.